Rutter v. Shoshone Min. Co.

This case involves a dispute over mining land where complainants filed an adverse claim under Rev. St. § 2326 to defendant's application for a patent. The defendant demurred, challenging federal jurisdiction and arguing the suit was legal rather than equitable. The court overruled the demurrer, holding that (1) federal courts have jurisdiction because suits under § 2326 arise under federal law, and (2) such suits are equitable in nature as they determine entitlement to a patent from the government, involve equitable titles, and resemble actions for conveyance. The decision relies on circuit court precedent and distinguishes contrary Supreme Court dicta.

Complainants filed an adverse claim against defendant's patent application for mining land. Defendant demurred, contesting federal jurisdiction and asserting the suit was legal rather than equitable. The court overruled the demurrer, holding federal courts have jurisdiction as the claim arises under federal law and the suit is equitable in nature, determining entitlement to a government patent involving equitable titles.

• Federal jurisdiction exists over § 2326 suits as federal questions
• Suits under § 2326 are equitable, not legal, actions
• Relies on Burke v. Concentrating Co. and Doe v. Mining Co.
• Distinguishes Bushnell v. Smelting Co.

• Suit based on adverse claim to application for patent to mining ground under Rev. St. § 2326

• Jurisdiction of federal courts
• Nature of suit as equitable or legal